A Research History of Laestadianism in Norway from the 1960S to the Present Day

ROLF INGE LARSEN A research history of Laestadianism in Norway From the 1960s to the present day DOI: https://doi.org/10.30664/ar.87497 Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) his article provides an overview and dis- compare how Laestadianism is approached cusses the history of research on Laesta- in academic disciplines, from perspectives dianism in Norway over the last 60 years. T of the insiders, and to see if there are geo Research history earlier than 1960 and doctoral theses are discussed in this issue of Approach- graphical nuances in the research areas of ing Religion by Roald E. Kristiansen and Bengt- Laestadianism in Norway. Ove Andreassen. It gives an impression of the Dagmar Sivertsen’s 1955 doctoral thesis, nuances in approach between different academic Læstadianismen i Norge (Laestadianism in disciplines and also different insider perspectives on Norwegian Laestadianism. The article shows Norway), represents a milestone in the that there is a need for comparative research on research on Laestadianism in Norway. Laestadianism in Norway between different geo- The object of Sivertsen’s work was to col graphic regions and academic disciplines. lect and present all Laestadian activity in Nor way, from when it came into being in This article provides an overview the 1840s right through to the 1950s. Prior and discussion of the research history of to this publication, Laestadian history had Laestadianism in Norway over the last comprised only geographically limited 60 years. Since articles on Norwegian accounts and ecclesiastical or Laestadian Laestadianism research produced earlier representations.2 The works that followed than 1960 and doctoral theses on the subject in the wake of Sivertsen’s doctoral thesis are presented elsewhere in this issue, this were still mostly limited in geographical article focuses solely on how Laestadianism in Norway is presented in journals, period icals, and books on reminis cence or local 2 Examples include Hendriks Kvandahl’s art history after 1960. This means that research icle series Den Læstadianske vækkelse (The from other countries that in various degrees Laestadian revival, 1902, 1903); Hjalmar covers Laestadian practice in Norway is Weste son’s Ödemarksprofetens lärjungar (The wasteland prophet’s pupils, 1922); P. C. 1 not discussed in this article. The aim is to Astrup’s ‘Bidrag til Finnmarkens kirkehis torie V. Læstadianismens særpreg’ (Contri 1 This excludes researchers like Pekka Rait bution to Finnmark’s church history V: the tila and Martti Miettinen in Finland, Lis characteristics of Laestadianism, 1927); and Mari Hjortfors and Eivind Torp in Sweden Ananias Brune’s Nogen ord om Læstadius og as well as Warren Hepokoski in the United Læstadianismen (Some words on Laesta States, just to mention a few. dius and Laestadianism, 1927). Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 1 • May 2020 74 and thematic terms, but what they all had relating to Laestadian preachers by, res in common was that she was cited in the pectively, Pekka Raittila (1967) and Roald list of references. Sivertsen’s thesis became E. Kristiansen (2004b). Both surveys cover a standard work that for a long time was Norwegian Laestadianism in a broad cited without any critical remarks. All sense. Kristiansen’s survey provides a short researchers of Laestadianism since 1960 biographical sketch of all the Laestadian have used Sivertsen’s doctoral thesis to preachers active in Norway from the 1850s varying degrees in narrating the first hun to the turn of the millennium. The sur dred years of Laestadianism in Norway. veys have been compiled with research Any challenges to her findings have tended on Laestadianism in mind and are handy to be as a result of new sources, and pre devices that highlight theo logical dif sented even then as an extension of her ferences and the geographic al spread research, rather than as a critique of her of Laestadianism in Norway. Kris tian perspectives or sources. The church histor sen includes this schematic depiction of ian Kåre Svebak is the only researcher that Laestadianism in Norway, providing a has challenged Sivertsen’s thesis in a separ concise overview of the fragmentations ate work (1986). Questioning Sivertsen’s that have led to the various offshoots of idea that the Laestadian movement served Laestadianism in Norway (see Fig. 1). This as an impedence to the establishment of figure gives an impression of the numer- free churches in northern Norway, Svebak ous varieties of Laestadian groups in detects several weaknesses in Sivertsen’s Norway. thesis. Another work that highlights the Two short histories of Norwegian breadth of Norwegian research on Laestad Laestadianism have been published ians is the University of Tromsø’s publi since Dagmar Sivert sen’s doctoral thesis; cation Vekkelse og vitenskap. Lars Levi Læs both written by theologians. These are tadius 200 år (Revival and science: Lars Levi Læstadianerne. Fra Nordkalottens kirke Laestadius 200 years), edited by Øyvind his torie (The Laestad ians: from the church Nordarval and Sigmund Nesset in 2000. history of North Calotte, 1977) by Olaf According to the Finnish researcher into Havdal, and a book by Per M. Aadna Laestadianism Jouko Talonen its publica nes, Læstadianismen i NordNoreg (Laes tion is a signal that the Norwegian research tadianism in Northern Nor way, 1986). Both community occupies a leading position of them essentially follow Sivertsen’s line within Laestadianism research (Musta of research and are, respectively, straight kallio 2002).3 The anthology consists of forward accounts of Lars Levi Læstadius thirteen articles with contributors from and his followers, and popularized works social anthropology, philosophy, religious intended for study at an elementary level. Both books provide interesting depictions of Laestadianism of their own time that 3 In addition to Vekkelse og vitenskap extend Sivertsen’s timeframe and dem (Norder val and Nesset 2000), four further onstrate Laestadian opposition to ecclesi anthologies have been published which astical reform and new theological trends are broadly linked to Laestadianism and Laestadius; see Prismet 1993; Mellem and during the 1960s and 1970s. ViinikkaKallinen 2001; Kristiansen 2002 Besides these historical depictions, and Norsk tidsskrift for misjonsvitenskap, two cadastral surveys have been published 2–3, 2016. Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 1 • May 2020 75 Figure 1. Laestadian movements in Norway. Translation of the figure in Kristiansen 2004b: 4. studies, theology, history, linguistics, edu puts forward the idea that the Laestadian cation and botany, who have collectively movement can be approached and under supplied a broad picture of Lars Levi stood in a variety of ways which this article Laestadius and Laestadianism in Norway. also intends to illustrate. Contributions in this anthology will be dis cussed consecutively in their own research Laestadianism research after 1960 fields below.4 One characteristic aspect is In addition to the master’s and other post that the authors to some extent adapt widely graduate dissertations listed below, several differing research models for their analysis. social science and churchhistory research Laestadianism is described here variously ers have written about Laestadianism in as a reaction against what is modern, as Norway. Historians EinarArne Drivenes being critical of the Church, as an element and Einar Niemi have observed that the of unrest in society, as a natural progression research in Norway has developed into of Christianity, fluctuating between a con three statement positions (Drivenes and servative and a dynamic movement, and as Niemi 2000: 158ff.): Firstly, as a culture an extension of Sami traditional religious conserving and culturallyjustifying theory, practice/shamanism. Thus, the anthology where Laestadianism is perceived as a political reaction and a response to threat ening tendencies in Norwegian society, 4 See the list of references in Andreassen and such as modernization and secularization Berglund 2000; Bolle 2000; Norderval and (Gjessing 1953; Paine 1965; Bjørklund Nesset 2000. 1985). Secondly, Laestadianism has been Approaching Religion • Vol. 10, No. 1 • May 2020 76 analysed in terms of a conciliation theory ten in Tromsø. These works span over the rooted in religion, where added weight time period from the 1850s to the present is given to the religious dimension, and day. There are four particular fields within expressions such as ‘religious ethnicity’ which Laestadianism is meas ured: ethnic are included in the explanations (Larssen ity, ecclesiastical affiliation, societal partici 1996). Finally, they point to a psychologiz pation and internal relationships. Many of ing theory, where Laestadianism, amongst these dissertations use a line of conflict as other things, is interpreted as ‘protection’ the linchpin in the analysis of such mat of Sami fellowship (J. I. Nergård 1994; J.–E. ters as the Laestadians in conflict with soci Nergård 2007; Meistad 1999). In the after ety as a whole and modernization, the state math of Drivenes and Niemi’s article some church, other Laestadians, and nonbeliev scholarly works have presented a fourth ers. One significant point in common is that statement position, where Laestadianism is the dissertations are linked to geograph presented as a ‘problem’ in the context of, ically limited areas, which means that it is for example, school policy, in local soci often local Laestadian congregations

Load more